And then there's the latest theory du jour, which is both less well-thought-out and more widely written about than either of those two examples. This new theory, created by a Redditor with a copy of Episode I and too much time on his hands, states that Jar Jar Binks was actually supposed to be a Sith Lord in league with Palpatine.

"It's entirely possible that Palpatine was a subordinate underling to Binks throughout both trilogies," writes the Redditor, before attempting to prove that various clips of Binks' buffoonery actually match a martial art called "Drunken Fist wushu." He believes that George Lucas was going to reveal Binks' villainy in Episode III until adverse reaction to the character convinced him otherwise, and that Binks will return in The Force Awakens in the form of Andy Serkis' motion-captured character, the mysterious Supreme Leader Snoke.

The notion is entirely fanciful, of course. Both Slate and the Washington Post have expended a lot of energy in proving the theory bogus, but here's one simple reason: Lucas, the ultimate perfectionist, never once reversed course on presenting the Star Wars series the way he wanted it.

It doesn't take much research to discover that Lucas based the bumbling Gungan on Harold Lloyd, not some kind of evil Bruce Lee:

The problem is the fervor with which casual fans have seized upon the Binks suggestion. Hardcore fans, not so much — perhaps because this is a time when bogus rumors about the new movie are rampant. Some fans, for example, earnestly believe that the lack of Luke Skywalker in the trailer means he's the villain Kylo Ren, despite the fact that Ren is clearly played by Adam Driver. (If you want to know why Luke is really absent, click here.)

There's the rub — whereas some theories are harmless fun, others spread harmful disinformation. To pick the most egregious example, we're still fighting a rear-guard action against the theory that John Boyega can't be a stormtrooper because of the color of his skin. That particular fan theory is not only racist, it's ignorant of the basics of the Star Wars universe (it's based on the notion that the clone troopers of the prequel trilogy simply became the stormtroopers of the original trilogy, which has been refuted within the Star Wars universe multiple times).

This proliferation of fan theories isn't limited to Star Wars, of course. We've seen the Internet consumed by a dark alternate universe ending to the happy 1990s sitcom Friends, and a new take on The Dark Knight Returns that suggests the Joker was a misunderstood hero all along. And then there was the 800-pound gorilla of fan theories, the every-Pixar-character-exists-in-the-same-universe theory that took one blogger a year of his life to construct, but remains controversial with Pixar fans to this day.

I'm not going all William Shatner here (in a legendary SNL sketch, the Captain Kirk actor told Star Trek fans asking him obsessively detailed questions about the show to "get a life"). Getting nerdy and obsessive about minutiae is all part of the fun of fandom.

I'm suggesting that it is time to distinguish between theories.

There's the counterfactual kind, where a fan will find evidence to fit a fanciful notion, the more outrageous the better. (Jar Jar is a Sith Lord! Phoebe imagined the whole plot of 'Friends'!) It's easy to bolster these fast-and-loose ideas, if you look hard enough. Indeed, the process should probably be taught in high school science classes as a prime example of confirmation bias. Let's file that kind of theory under "entertainment."

But if you're not willing to overlook the plain facts of what the author/director/showrunner intended, there's another kind of theory — more earnest, not quite as flashy. No one is going to write a viral post about the complex majesty that is Star Wars ring theory, but it's pretty fascinating once you dig in. It also has the benefit of being entirely consistent with Lucas and his stated aims for the series.

Because the Creator, as Lucas called himself, did actually set out to hide a whole bunch of Easter eggs in those controversial prequels. For better or worse, he wanted elements of the movies to "rhyme" with the original trilogy. No doubt he feels vindicated by all the debate still taking place a decade later.

But for the sake of all our sanity, let's look for the stories that are there before we make up ones that aren't.

Mashable
is a global, multi-platform media and entertainment company. Powered by its own proprietary technology, Mashable is the go-to source for tech, digital culture and entertainment content for its dedicated and influential audience around the globe.